The dynamics of learning alliances: competition, cooperation, and relative scope

Abstract

We show how the tension between cooperation and competition affects the dynamics of learning alliances. ‘Private benefits’ and ‘common benefits’ differ in the incentives that they create for investment in learning. The competitive aspects of alliances are most severe when a firm's ratio of private to common benefits is high. We introduce a measure, ‘relative scope’ of a firm in an alliance, to show that the opportunity set of each firm outside an alliance crucially impacts its behavior within the alliance. Finally, we suggest why firms might deviate from the theoretically optimal behavior patterns. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Institutional distance and knowledge acquisition in international buyer-supplier relationships: The moderating role of trust

“…Although knowledge transfer through international networks has become a shot gun approach for a firm to acquire knowledge that it could not easily develop within its confines (Narteh, 2008), intrinsic competition between collaborative partners becomes an inevitable dilemma in knowledge transfer processes, in that one partner might opportunistically take advantage of the cooperation to learn about the other partner's knowledge, and in some extreme cases, to acquire technological secrets without the other's consent (Khanna, Gulati, & Nohria, 1998;Muthusamy & White, 2005). Much prior research has emphasized the cynical role played by opportunism in the acquisition of new knowledge because it prevents firms from effectively and efficiently learning from their external partners (e.g., Ding, Huang, & Liu, 2012;McEvily, Das, & McCabe, 2000).…”

The role of incentives and communication in strategic alliances: an experimental investigation

“…Agarwal, R. Croson, and J. T. Mahoney the context of alliance dynamics specifically, Khanna et al, (1998) use an economics game theoretic lens and develop theoretical propositions relating economic incentives to success in strategic alliances. This research underscores the potential for learning races when strategic alliance partners may benefit more through noncooperation than by pursuing a common goal in the absence of incentive alignment.…”

“…In addition, exchange partners can pursue their own interest over the strategic alliance by engaging in economic holdup and/or in learning races (Doz, 1996;Khanna et al, 1998).…”

Coopetition Strategies in the Brazilian Higher Education

“…They are motivated by increased competition based on technology, environmental dynamism, or the demand for additional resources so they can acquire and share knowledge and technological development, access new markets, expand scale gains, create barriers of entry, and focus on their target activity (Khanna et al, 1998).…”

“…Moreover, relationships fail when the agents do not recognize the asymmetry of benefits and perceive injustice (Khanna et al, 1998). Coopetition creates dependency that is manifested through the negotiation of information between the parties.…”